denoir wrote:
Good captures Bifurcator, but you should ditch that toy camera and get a real one
OK, sell me a "real one" for $200 please. I also want one that can connect all the lenses I come across without having to mutate them. Poor little lenses!
this shot is most excellent. you captured such a great, great moment.
feet cut off? man blurred from movement? whatever, doesnt matter to me. the look in her eyes is so overwhelming that I can forget anything that might not be "right".
Bifurcator wrote:
OK, sell me a "real one" for $200 please. I also want one that can connect all the lenses I come across without having to mutate them. Poor little lenses!
I'm sure that GH1 cost more than $200! I think you should be able to get a 5D for the price of a new GH1..
denoir wrote:
I'm sure that GH1 cost more than $200!.
Nope. I bought my first one new in-box for $350 (body only) about 4 or 5 months ago. Then about a month ago Panasonic cut their GH1 kit prices in half. At just about the same time I bought my second one as a replacement while they were fixing the first one (which I intended to sell once it came back - as they told me it could take up to 7 weeks or something) and I paid $230 for it - new in box body only, full warrantee. Right now 3 or 4 weeks later, they are $210 for the same deals.
I think you should be able to get a 5D for the price of a new GH1.
And it's only 13mpx so the differences between it will be minimal. The advantages of a FF sensor get a massive kick in the azz when the pixel count is increased. It's better at the same pixel count of course but not all that much from what I've seen.
Then there's lens fitting. There's a few problems that come up here. One is I would have to open my own machine-shop just to be able to use all the lenses that I want to try out. The other is of course that many many of the lenses that are just simply primo on a crop sensor (like the Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD macro that's on it now) kinda suck on a FF sensor. Soft corners, distortion, vignetting, etc.. An "awesome" lens on the GH1 has great potential to suck on a FF body. And the opposite of that statement is also true: A sucky lens on a FF has the potential to be awesome on the GH1.
Then there's lack of an EVF on the 5D - this is something I have been waiting for for 6 years. LCDs are useless to me. For me the only purpose of an LCD is showing other people an image that's on the camera.
There's no movies on a 5D. The GH1 is a production quality (that's higher than broadcast quality for those of you still reading this) camcorder (after the custom firmware is added) with fully manual operation.
I would be sacrificing everything I had been holding out for (over the past 6 years) in order to gain a very slight advantage in still IQ and spending 12 times as much in order to do so. Hmmm....
But I'm still listening if you have any other suggestions.
On topic, here's another Rokkor image from an overnight beer chat I had with a good friend of mine a few days ago:
Luka, Greenache, Helimat, Bifurcator - really love the shots!
Luka: Thank you!.. Just remembered Ren & Stimpy when I saw that dog's face...hehehe
Yokosuka visit yesterday, had to take my 35-70/3.4 for a walk so Rokkor got a bit of a rest. Still snapped few night shots, though nothing amazingly incredible. So I post something old...in landscape orientation for a change..
That's a reasonable price for an 5D MkII, not 5D. I paid about $2800 for my 5DII. A 5D ("Classic") should be much cheaper. You can find one for around $1000:
And it's only 13mpx so the differences between it will be minimal. The advantages of a FF sensor get a massive kick in the azz when the pixel count is increased. It's better at the same pixel count of course but not all that much from what I've seen.
The really big difference is in color rendering and dynamic range. I had a GF1 for a short while (incidentally it cost me - including 20mm pancake - about $1200, but that was when it was newly released. I relatively quickly concluded that while it had nice resolving power that the color rendering was more related to a cell phone cam than to a full frame DSLR. I really liked its high res LCD, relatively fast contrast AF and its size but the poor color rendering and the 2x crop factor killed my interest in it. Later I got a Leica X1 as a substitute which produced far better colors but that is overall far more primitive (sloow AF, impossible MF, sluggish overall etc). I've kept the Leica as the image quality and size justifies it.
Still, the X1's sensor is inferior to my 7D which is very inferior to my 5DII (again a situation where the 7D is a much better overall camera but the 5DII IQ blows it away). If there were digital medium format cameras with CMOS sensors (for live view), I'd get one in a heart beat.
The common wisdom that you should prioritize glass over camera body is valid for somebody considering upgrading a kit lens or getting a new camera. At the level we're discussing here, I'd say FF should be a very high priority. I'd rather have one really good Zeiss lens on an FF camera than all my glass on a cropper.
You can see the difference in color rendering in this thread - between your GH1 (2x crop), Dmitri's 20D (1.6x crop) and my 5DII (FF). Yes, there is a bound to be a difference in PP but I very rarely do any color correction except setting the white balance.
Then there's lack of an EVF on the 5D - this is something I have been waiting for for 6 years. LCDs are useless to me. For me the only purpose of an LCD is showing other people an image that's on the camera.
Yes, that's a very big disadvantage. I can't imagine living without live view - I use it all the time. A lack of live view is what is currently preventing me from going digital medium format.
Still having to choose between FF without live view or crop with live view, I'd cry a bit but I'd go with the FF camera.
There are like a zillion Techno/Trance/Dance records and it's impossible to recognize which record in this (very nice) picture. I have some turntables myself and a lot of records, so this picture makes me to take my camera+rokkor58/1.2 to make some nice pictures of it (the last were about 7 years ago with my Canon A70...).
denoir wrote:
That's a reasonable price for an 5D MkII, not 5D. I paid about $2800 for my 5DII. A 5D ("Classic") should be much cheaper. You can find one for around $1000:
I for sure don't want to buy a used camera though. Lenses are fine like that but not bodies IMO. I take way too many pictures and would drain the remaining life out of the poor thing much too quickly.
Bifurcator wrote:
And it's only 13mpx so the differences between it will be minimal. The advantages of a FF sensor get a massive kick in the azz when the pixel count is increased. It's better at the same pixel count of course but not all that much from what I've seen.
denoir wrote:
The really big difference is in color rendering and dynamic range. I had a GF1 for a short while (incidentally it cost me - including 20mm pancake - about $1200, but that was when it was newly released. I relatively quickly concluded that while it had nice resolving power that the color rendering was more related to a cell phone cam than to a full frame DSLR. I really liked its high res LCD, relatively fast contrast AF and its size but the poor color rendering and the 2x crop factor killed my interest in it. Later I got a Leica X1 as a substitute which produced far better colors but that is overall far more primitive (sloow AF, impossible MF, sluggish overall etc). I've kept the Leica as the image quality and size justifies it.
Still, the X1's sensor is inferior to my 7D which is very inferior to my 5DII (again a situation where the 7D is a much better overall camera but the 5DII IQ blows it away). If there were digital medium format cameras with CMOS sensors (for live view), I'd get one in a heart beat.
The common wisdom that you should prioritize glass over camera body is valid for somebody considering upgrading a kit lens or getting a new camera. At the level we're discussing here, I'd say FF should be a very high priority. I'd rather have one really good Zeiss lens on an FF camera than all my glass on a cropper.
You can see the difference in color rendering in this thread - between your GH1 (2x crop), Dmitri's 20D (1.6x crop) and my 5DII (FF). Yes, there is a bound to be a difference in PP but I very rarely do any color correction except setting the white balance. ...Show more →
Yeah, I can follow that logic. I'm not there yet tho - myself. I'm having WAY too much fun playing with all these different lenses. So far I'm averaging about 4 lenses per week. Get them, open them up and see how they work, clean and/or repair what needs be, and then go play to see how their centers render on the GH1. Then finally sell them off to pay for the next round - or keep the ones I like some features of.
Bifurcator wrote:
Then there's lack of an EVF on the 5D - this is something I have been waiting for for 6 years. LCDs are useless to me. For me the only purpose of an LCD is showing other people an image that's on the camera.
denoir wrote:
Yes, that's a very big disadvantage. I can't imagine living without live view - I use it all the time. A lack of live view is what is currently preventing me from going digital medium format.
Still having to choose between FF without live view or crop with live view, I'd cry a bit but I'd go with the FF camera.
I hear ya. When they release a mirrorless FF I may go for it if the prices are reasonable. I'm already thinking and wondering abut the APS-C NEX cameras. If I were working as a photographer I'd have an MF in a nice studio and either the big Nikon or the top Canon for the field. For now I'm good with just this little GH1 and it's well suited for my current purpose(s). When the FF jobbers offer the features I would demand if paying $x000.00 then I'll likely step up. Till then I'd just be compromising too much.
I also want one that can connect all the lenses I come across without having to mutate them. Poor little lenses! 
Just remembered Ren & Stimpy when I saw that dog's face...hehehe